Meeting minutes
Richard’s feedback on our alternative table: “In the 'alternative table' i'm not clear about why diacritics are called out (and why cedillas are on a separate line). It seems to me that the primary function is less important than accessibility issues such as whether they are legible (or in some cases even present), whether they should or
should not be included in search keys, etc. Note, btw, that Thai tone marks, etc, are also a type of diacritic. The table doesn't appear to have a clear objective, since it mixes rows related to diacritics with rows related to script types.”
<Makoto> +present
Review version 2 pattern drafts: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pnaq0fVSLsYDmrC_kpBkvE5fRALe2Jfo0Ff5H3azXcY/edit?usp=sharing
Google notes: https://
Pattern Review Document: https://
<Makoto> We might want to mention ISO 7000 / ISO 7010 although they are not designed for the Web.
Makoto: These 2 ISO standards specify icons and they are international - they are not for the web - they are for equipment, but some of them are still useful and we should reference these.
Andy: As a group, maybe we could partner with the Internationalization Working Group to develop a set of digital icons that are international - create a standard for digital icons and make it an ISO standard, if possible.
Andy: The term, "controls" might need a definition. People who are in the accessibility profession probably know what this is, but it could be mistranslated - would this mean that we hinder them from understanding the guidance?
Philipp: "Controls" is a term that is used throughout WCAG, so I would prefer that we provide a definition of "interactive element" and give examples of what it means.
Frankie: In the work that I've done, I've always used "interactive elements" because it translate more easily. The word "control" is in WCAG, which can be confusing, compared with how we might describe it. There are many definitions in this realm. It would help to see documents completely filled out before reviewing them. We should be seeing
definitions and tests.
Andy: WCAG is hard to understand and I think it's because of the use of this kind of language.
Philipp: Can we make it "Interactive Elements (Controls)" - If you want people to use the guidance, you have to help them understand it.
Jean: "Use the platform-specific user interface design on controls" - this difficult to understand. Suggestion: Use the standard user interface design on controls for a given platform."
Frankie: How about just removing "on controls" - Use the platform-specific user interface design.
Andy: The sentence, "Reduce cognitive load by using buttons, toggles, and other controls that look and behave like the standard ones for a specific platform such as iOS or Android"is too long. Maybe shorten to "Use platform specific buttons, toggles, and other interactive elements."
Frankie: Or ... "Use platform specific buttons, toggles, and other interactive elements to reduce cognitive load."
Frankie: Glossaries are important to help people understand this.
Andy: It would be really nice to be able to switch to simple language so that you have the "professional" explanation, but a simple way to understand it.
Philipp: Why is the "Links that look like buttons" a "Do" example? We should not cave on this being bad practice.
General comment from several people: It's hard to review documents for internationalization feedback without the document being in a more complete state, including a glossary and testing.